What can I do with my 582?

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

Joined
Apr 19, 2020
Messages
16
Hey guys, I have a 582 gray head, I am looking to :
1) make it as reliable and efficient as possible
2) get as much power out of it as possible while keeping it as reliable and efficient as possible.
Any ideas on my options here?
 

proppastie

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2012
Messages
4,558
Location
NJ
I believe unless you know what you are doing stock is the best compromise.....get the manuals and set it up by the book. Your question says to me ....that for you that might be the safest way to go.
 

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
13,003
Location
Memphis, TN
If you want to do he work, blueprint it to the nth decimal place or find someone who will. Although some will have hot rod advice, I say keep it stock but make it perfect. Unless you are already an expert, more chance to mess it up than help.
 

MadProfessor8138

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2015
Messages
845
Location
Ekron,Kentucky
There's really only 4 things that you can do to get more power out of your 582.

1. Change exhaust & carb jetting....
When the Mini500 helicopter was still in production they offered a PEP kit...Power Enhancement Package...that took the engine to 75hp.
Call Rotax Rick...his 670 exhaust may work on a 582...not sure.

2. Gearbox & prop......you may not need more hp....you may just need a better gearbox ratio and more efficient prop.

3. Big bore kit......reliability starts to go down with every step up in piston size.

4. Mod the hell out of it.....exhaust,carbs jetting,big bore,port & polish everything.
When you go this route...all bets are off for reliability.

If you absolutely need more than 75 hp out of your 582...its time to call Rotax Rick and get him to build you a Rotax 670.
Same size as a 582 and can be mistaken for one when they are setting side by side,other than the RAVE valves.
But the 670 can be built from 94hp - 130hp and be reliable.

Kevin
 
Last edited:

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
7,402
Location
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
I have another idea. This is coming from someone who is admittedly NOT a 2-stroke expert, but I do believe I am speaking the truth here.

People who have real-world hands-on exeprience with this can feel free to correct me. However, excessive use of technicolor and/or exclamation points in a rebuttal will result in being tarred and feathered...

1) There are special Molybdenum Disulfide coatings that have been developed that increase lubricity of the metal, which reduces hear, friction, etc. Kal-Gard . KG Coatings is one such coating, there are several others. These are sprayed onto freshly cleaned and prepped parts, then baked into the metal surface at certain temperatures. On racing engines these coatings allow the engine to survive a little longer while the engine is being flogged hard in a race. But in this case, having the Moly coating on certain parts will make it last a lot longer at the normal power levels you should be using in an airplane (as opposed to a race bike, sled, etc.) So you would be using racer technology to add safety instead of adding speed.

2) Same concept with special ceramic coatings that are applied to the tops of the pistons, exhaust ports, and exhaust pipes. They reflect some portion of the heat before it soaks into the metal, allowing the part to run a little cooler than it would have. So my suggestion is to use those coatings in a different way than racers use them... in your engine the reduction of heat adds safety and service life to the parts at normal power levels.

It is my understanding that the failure mode on many 2-stroke Rotax engines is the combustion heat going across the top outer edge of the piston (towards the exhaust port), and creating a hot spot at the edge of the piston next to the port. The heat builds up at that spot so much that it softens the aluminum piston, which melts, and causes an engine stoppage. So the ceramic coating could keep a little bit of the heat out of that piston. The added lubricity form the Moly coating would reduce friction and heat and galling of metal-to-metal parts.

I invite the real 2-stroke experts here to verify or de-bunk this.
 
Last edited:

quick582

Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2020
Messages
9
Deleted the body of the post. I can do whatever I want in my own shop.

Mini-500's are deathtraps. I had many good friends killed. Good friends, experienced pilots, mechanically savvy. I am both, more than you can imagine. To suggest that it was the pilots fault is terribly misinformed. After 9 deaths people learned that Dennis Fetters is a liar and crook and is responsible for every one of them. You are lucky, hopefully this will continue.
 
Last edited:

MadProfessor8138

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2015
Messages
845
Location
Ekron,Kentucky
quick582.......I'm a tad bit befuddled at the advice you gave in your post.
You start out by saying leave the engine stock and then get into all the mods that you plan to try to make more hp.
I understand that you are not telling the OP to do these mods but why bring them up to someone that is seeking basic knowledge on a particular subject ?

You claim that (ROTAX KNOWS WHAT THEY ARE DOING) and designed & built an engine that any idiot could operate.
Yes and no.....yes Rotax has to take idiots into consideration when producing an engine but they are still suseptable to smarter idiots that can destroy anything.
So,no.....not everyone is smart enough to operate a 2-stroke correctly & reliably.
And Rotax is not special...they are suseptable to bad parts runs just like any other company....think crank bearings.
I wont point out the particular quirks of the 582 engine as you should be well versed with them....and,oh yes,there are quirks.

You claim to have had a disastrous result from using a PEP kit on your 582 in a Mini500.....you obviously didn't listen to the advice Dennis gave everyone about operating the Rotax 582 ,with or without the PEP kit.
Let me guess.....you kept getting exceedingly high EGT & CHT temps every time you dropped the collective,possibly even cylinder scoring & seizures ??
Mine has ran flawlessly for over 400 hours on regular maintenance and following the advice given from the now defunked company.
I didn't buy a special engine....I just listened to what the man/company said and I do maintenance.
IMG_0803.jpg

You said to NEVER ,UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES INSTALL A PIPE...but then you go on to describe half a dozen ways that you are going to change/modify the exhaust to try for a flatter torque curve and more power.
Do you have access to a dyno or are you just going to use a SEAT OF THE PANTS approach by strapping it to the MXll airframe to judge whether your mods are successful or not ?

I've yet to see anyone cure any problem with their engine by using individual filters on the carbs....it generally creates more, unless there is a very particular circumstance that requires individuals.
Who are these people that have issues with Bing54 carbs and then cure all their ills by switching to Mikuni's...I would really like to talk with them.

You said that if you need more power then you will change over to a Rotax 617.
You do realize that the 617 is a sled engine,correct ?
And that the 618 has been built for aircraft use throughout the years, right ?
Evidently Rotax didn't have EVERYTHING correct,since Rick is able to take their engines and improve performance & reliability with them.
Why reinvent the wheel by experimenting & guessing when a phone call to Ron (Rotax Rick) down in Florida will answer every question that you could conceivably ask ?
The man has been there,done that,has the coffee cup,commemorative coin,t-shirt and will talk to you for 2 hours explaining it all to you.
Oh,and btw.....he loves the exhaust he designed that gives a flatter torque curve and more power......so much for NEVER UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE INSTALL A PIPE.

Kevin
 
Last edited:

MadProfessor8138

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2015
Messages
845
Location
Ekron,Kentucky
quick582.......YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT....you really can do whatever you want in your own shop..all day long.
But that fact isnt even remotely the point.
The point was....the OP asked a specific question to gain knowledge on a subject.
You then offered advice from the viewpoint that you are a Rotax 582 GURU but then transitioned to the fact that you've had the same question and you're going to start experimenting with the engine to see what outcome you can acheive.
All by the seat of your pants.....

Why did you delete the 20,000 word body of your original post ?
If your outlandish statements are valid then I'm sure someone will jump in and correct my dispute of your claims.

And now that you've deleted the original HUGE post with outlandish statements pertaining to Rotax you've replaced it with another post making outlandish claims about a particular aircraft/designer...Dennis/the Mini500.
Let me guess.....you're probably friends with Stewart and his posse arent you ?
To say that I am uneducated and naive is a HUGE misstep on your part and your assumptions would be quite inaccurate.
Yes the Mini500 had issues...and yes,I fixed my issues and have a wonderful aircraft to show for it.
Why dont you give Joe Reinke a call and he can educate you on the Mini500...he is a wealth of information and a real Salt of the Earth kind of guy with a great personality.
Or,if you prefer to talk with Dennis then I can make that happen for you too.

So now we are at 2 outlandish claims that you have made......the Rotax 582 and now the Mini500.
Are you going to delete that post as well.... ??????????

Btw.....since you made the statement :
Why dont you go into detail of your piloting experience and just exactly how mechanically savvy you are.
That way I dont have to imagine anything.
I must warn you though....my imagination can be quite vast....so thrill me in your post.
So,let's put that 4th post that you're about to make to the Forum right in the ole pickle barrel.......steady,steady

Isn't she pretty.....
IMG_0700.jpg
IMG_0802.jpg

Kevin
 
Last edited:

MadProfessor8138

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2015
Messages
845
Location
Ekron,Kentucky
Victor Bravo......interesting post and I will give my somewhat limited education opinion.
And your statement applies to me as well....if I'm wrong then someone please correct me as well.
The use of coatings on metal is nothing new,as we all know...from cooking utensils to parts on the space shuttle,etc.
But I think there are a few factors that would have to be considered in the big picture.
Is the coating compatible with the material,will the coating inhibit heat absorption & proper expansion,will the coating survive in the environment that it is being utilized ?
Also,is the average homebuilder capable of applying the coating correctly himself/herself in their shop if he/she is not able to purchase pre-coated parts....sending parts off to be coated might be a possibility.
But I think you may get yourself backed into a corner if you're not careful.
We know that strengthening a componant on an airframe can sometimes have disastrous results on other areas of the airframe.
I wonder how much of a possibility that is with an engine ?
This is not fact but merely an example.....coat the crank and rod bearings and now more stress is put on the rod...etc.

You commented on the piston having a hot spot which ultimately leads to failure and I believe you are correct on that assumption.
I think the ceramic coated pistons help with three issues....and once again,if I'm wrong then someone correct me.
1. The ceramic coating helps eliminate heat absorption and helps eliminate the hot spot on the piston.
2. The ceramic coating helps eliminate heat absorption by the piston and it brings the piston & cylinder expansion rates closer to each other which helps reduce cold seizures.
3. I think the ceramic coating helps strengthen the top of the piston and helps with blowing a hole through the piston from detonation.

I believe coatings are very useful tools if utilized in the proper environment......
Thoughts........???

Where's Armilite when you need him.......?!

Kevin
 

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
7,402
Location
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
I have almost zero experience with 2-strokes (on full-size aircraft). So what I posted is subject to correction by those who know more than I do, or those who have specific experience I don't.

My limited understanding is also that you are far better off having these specialized coatings put on by a qualified race shop. Some people can do it in their home shops, but many can't. Just like painting, the prep work is where the whole job will succeed or fail.
 

n3puppy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2019
Messages
138
I have almost zero experience with 2-strokes (on full-size aircraft). So what I posted is subject to correction by those who know more than I do, or those who have specific experience I don't.
My first hand experience with anti-friction coatings on piston skirts is as follows.

Having installed the black "moly" coated pistons in several ATV's, the benefits are very limited.
My experience (and others I know) is that the coating wears off very quickly.
It may have some benefit on start-up right after a rebuild as the piston/rings get seated. (Much like adding more oil for a short time after rebuild)

But examination of the pistons after only a few hours shows the coating is gone in the high friction areas like where the piston rocks fore and aft in the cylinder. Still visible in some areas, but bare aluminum in others.

I will say that I do not have experience with coatings on pistons from the high-end suppliers such as Wiseco. It may be possible that those coatings are better than the ones applied to lower priced foreign produced aftermarket pistons
 

MadProfessor8138

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2015
Messages
845
Location
Ekron,Kentucky
Interesting tid bit from the motocross world......

With a cast iron sleeved cylinder...you're pretty much boring the sleeve oversize with every piston & ring change...no choice.

With the Nikasil plated cylinders.....guys are going 20-30 piston & ring changes before the cylinder bore needs to be addressed.
That's how hard the plating is.

Kevin
 

quick582

Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2020
Messages
9
"So,let's put that 4th post that you're about to make to the Forum right in the ole pickle barrel.......steady,steady"


I'd rather you put me in touch with Gil Armbruster. Oh wait, you cant, he was killed in a Mini-500.
I deleted the post because rather than comment, you made it personal attacks. Which you continue to do. Guys like you take the fun out of forums like this.
Joe Reinke is a genius, the best thing that ever happened to the Mini-500. He shouldn't even be mentioned in the same paragraph as Dennis Fettters.

I wont rise to baited comments again. Waste your posts on someone who cares.
 

MadProfessor8138

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2015
Messages
845
Location
Ekron,Kentucky
quick582.....glad to hear back from you.
I never personally attacked you....on the contrary.
Trust me when I tell you that if I ever personally attacked you...it will be straight forward,to your face and we will both be armed........a little Malcolm Reynolds for you there,from the greatest show ever aired.
My sin is calling you out on your outlandish claims and giving you the opportunity to prove me wrong.
But instead of refuting what I called you out on you have decided to take the route of the martyr and place the blame on me.
I didn't make the outlandish claims or degrade a company/person......that was you.
You should have left your original post intact and anyone thinking me the bad guy could have called me on the issue.
So,I will ask you again to educate me on the points that you brought up and maybe I will have a better perspective of your viewpoint.
1. What is your flying experience ?
2. What is your mechanical ability ?
3. What is your experience with a Rotax 582 ?
4. Why do you have such a hatred towards the Mini500 and evidently anyone involved with it ?

You seem to take losing people very hard...and I can sympathize with you.
I've had many people in my life taken from old age,disease,war,motorcycle accidents,car accidents,aircraft accidents,etc.....
But things happen in life that are out of our control.
Unfortunately,you have to learn to cope with that fact and not harbor on it.

Why don't you respond to the questions that I've listed and maybe we can find some common ground.....
If you would rather send a private response instead of posting on the thread feel free to do that....

Kevin
 
Last edited:

koyama

Active Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
34
Location
Sunfair, Ca / USA
The 582 is a bad choice for the Mini 500. It is sad that the designer decided to go with this engine even though the factory claimed it was unsuited for the task. The 582 was intended to drive a propeller, not a rotor. With a rotor, all bets are off as to the reliability of the engine.
There are many people that claim to have had success with driving a rotor with the 582, and this is likely true. (The 582 is a really tough engine that is capable of some amazing things.) The problem is that I have yet to see any solid information published about what is needed to do so. This by nature means that you are pretty much on your own, working in the dark with a completely unknown outcome until someone publishes solid information. Or you build a few engines and test them to the point of actual failure.
Sorry, but this is the reality of it...
 

koyama

Active Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
34
Location
Sunfair, Ca / USA
You commented on the piston having a hot spot which ultimately leads to failure and I believe you are correct on that assumption.
I think the ceramic coated pistons help with three issues....and once again,if I'm wrong then someone correct me.
1. The ceramic coating helps eliminate heat absorption and helps eliminate the hot spot on the piston.
2. The ceramic coating helps eliminate heat absorption by the piston and it brings the piston & cylinder expansion rates closer to each other which helps reduce cold seizures.
3. I think the ceramic coating helps strengthen the top of the piston and helps with blowing a hole through the piston from detonation.

I believe coatings are very useful tools if utilized in the proper environment......
Thoughts........???
Kevin
Your request for thoughts is hereby answered!
Below are mine...

I have heard many people claim that coatings could help the 582. This might be true. However, I have yet to see it demonstrated, and I can see far more problems than solutions.

It is true that a coating could help with a hot spot on the piston...
However, under normal operating conditions, there should not be hot spots on the piston that lead to failures. When you see failures due to hot spots, there is a always cause for it that has nothing to do with whether the part is coated or not. Sure a coating may make the part survive the problem longer, but all it will do is delay a failure for a few minutes, or move the failure elsewhere. You end up with a needless game of Whack-A-Mole. That is not of much help, especially if the part not failing leads to the problem being missed and remaining in service. This is not a desirable outcome. Another argument is that the parts are already expensive enough! I don't want even more expensive parts! Also, no matter how good the coating is, in some case or another it will find a way to depart, and there is nothing worse than a 2 stroke crank that has been running while bombarded with ceramic or chrome dust!

The 582 is a time proven engine that works just fine without any high tech coatings that are being mentioned. Let's face it people, sometimes the best solution is low tech, and good old operator training!

It is possible that coatings could increase the service life of some moving parts, but that really does not make sense.
The problem is that by the TBO is hit, there are MANY issues that need to be otherwise addressed. In particular, seals wearing out, threads in bolt holes failing, the magneto wiring and laminations, cracks in the cases, gears worn out, jet needles worn, leaks, you name it... When it is time for a rebuild, the parts that people are talking about putting coatings on are usually just worn some, and otherwise ok. It is everything else that needs attention...

Also, there is no clear distinction in these conversations between increasing service life, and preventing a failure.
The 582s that I see for work are in two categories, they were misused, or worn out. The worn out ones run just fine and had no failures other than it was time for a rebuild. The abused ones were literally broken in some way and would not run. What I see way too much is people claiming that coatings would have prevented the failure! This is insane! Proper use would have prevented the failure not a coating! In the 33 years I have been working with 582s (yes, I was working with factory samples before they were released to the public), I have yet to see one that failed that was not due to misuse. People are very creative at finding ways to abuse them!

So below is my OPINION of the quoted points above:

1) Somewhat true, but misleading. It does not eliminate heat absorption, it reduces it. Toyota uses anodized pistons to lower heat transfer to the top of the piston, there are solid numbers that show that this works, especially in air cooled engines where things run at the top end of the heat window. Ceramic coatings were tested by Volkswagen in the 1960's in 2 stroke engines and shown to lower piston temps.
None of this applies to the 582 though, as both of the tests were done on air cooled engines. The 582 is water cooled, and the cylinder temperature is MUCH lower and the piston to cylinder distance is much smaller, so the piston has far better cooling, so cooling related issues do not appear in the 582 unless something is seriously incorrect, in which case coatings would be of no help.

2) Probably correct on some engines, but not likely the 582. It depends if you are talking about the top and or side coatings. Again, coatings do not eliminate heat transfer, they reduce it. The 582 uses a cam ground piston, it is not round at room temperature, it is oval, and not the same dimensions side to side. At running temperature, it becomes round. The piston was designed to compensate for uneven heating without a coating. By adding a coating to the pistons sides or top, it will have to be reshaped to compensate for the reduced heat transfer. This is no simple task and would take a few years of trial and error to get right. Also coatings on the sides of the piston reduce heat transfer from the piston to the cylinder. This allows the piston to be more thermally independent, and can cause cold seizures because the piston can warm up quick and not transfer heat to the cylinder. (Or the cylinder can cool quickly and shrink onto the hotter piston.) Coatings on the top only may slow piston heating and allow the cylinder to expand in time to not cause a cold seizure. However, cold seizures are 100% preventable by proper operation. Coatings or engine modifications should not be substituted for improper operation!

3) True, but likely not applicable. Ceramic coated pistons have been shown to resist damage from detonation by testing done by Honda in the 1970's. However, let's say that you had a magical piston that did not melt a hole in the top from detonation, how long do you think the engine would continue to run under such conditions before something else broke? I have in my collection of junk a 582 cylinder with a melted exhaust passage and broken sleeve, and a melted 582 head, both from detonation on two different engines. In both, the piston top that was exposed to the detonation was damaged badly, but was not the cause of the pilot taking an unexpected glider lesson. In the case of the melted head, it was a broken crank, and in the case of the melted cylinder, it was a piece of the sleeve that ended up in the opposite cylinder and caught between the piston and cylinder at one of the intake ports. So if a coating saved the piston here, it would not have mattered. Frankly, I have never seen a detonation situation where it would have mattered, there was always some other damage that needed to be corrected before the engine could be returned to service.

The conclusion here, is that while coatings might help, it seems pointless as it would not improve the TBO because everything else is needing attention. Also, it would take far more testing and verification than it is worth to demonstrate that coatings would help. Also when a coated part fails, the coating that is released into the engine (with the exception of Teflon like coatings) causes far more damage, and needlessly drives up the cost or repair.

When someone wants to publish such testing results, they will have my attention for sure! But until then, I am quite happy with the way things are.
 

MadProfessor8138

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2015
Messages
845
Location
Ekron,Kentucky
koyama.........thank you for that post...a great read and very informative.
A few things to comment on ......in no specific order.
You are correct.....the 582 was not & is not the best choice of engines to power a Mini500.
But....waaaay back in the 90's it was just about the only game in town...there really weren't other engine options readily available.
The common problems owners experienced were generally pilot induced.
They had cold seizures... because they tried to rush the warm up procedure and didn't let the temp stabilize at around 140°- 150° before flight.
They saw excessively high EGT & CHT temps when dropping the collective on decent due to the engine going lean and rpm's still being pushed up by the rotor.....there are particular flight maneuvers to help with the issue and running a premix in the fuel along with the oil injection system helped quite a bit.
I've also witnessed people jockeying the throttle excessively because they couldn't get use to the collective & throttle not being correlated....there was an aftermarket correlator that solved that issue.
Also,some people just expected more out of the engine then it was capable of giving and those same individuals were horrendous with maintenance.
I would have to look back through my files but off the top of my head I can't recall any accident that was caused by a mechanical failure other than the engine.
And of those engine failures I can't recall a failure that wasn't pilot induced in one way or another.
If quick582 or anyone else can point out a particular incident of a mechanical failure other than an engine failure I will look it up.

On the subject of coatings.....it's always been my understanding that one of the benefits is that a ceramic coated piston will have a slower expansion rate than a non-coated piston.
This would bring the expansion rates of the piston and cylinder more in line with each other and help with cold seizures.
Is this correct ???

Kevin
 
Last edited:

koyama

Active Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
34
Location
Sunfair, Ca / USA
But....waaaay back in the 90's it was just about the only game in town...there really weren't other engine options readily available.
The common problems owners experienced were generally pilot induced.
They had cold seizures... because they tried to rush the warm up procedure and didn't let the temp stabilize at around 140°- 150° before flight.
They saw excessively high EGT & CHT temps when dropping the collective on decent due to the engine going lean and rpm's still being pushed up by the rotor.....there are particular flight maneuvers to help with the issue and running a premix in the fuel along with the oil injection system helped quite a bit.

And of those engine failures I can't recall a failure that wasn't pilot induced in one way or another.

On the subject of coatings.....it's always been my understanding that one of the benefits is that a ceramic coated piston will have a slower expansion rate than a non-coated piston.
This would bring the expansion rates of the piston and cylinder more in line with each other and help with cold seizures.
Is this correct ???

Kevin
I trimmed the quite above to the parts that I am going to specifically answer.

It is true that there were very few engine choices during that time that were a good option for the Mini 500. But it cones down to one set of problems: Rotax specifically setup the 582 to drive a propeller, the choice of carburetors. rotary valve, and exhaust are specific for the flat torque curve of the task. The exhaust is a critical part of this, and Rotax considers the exhaust a critical engine part, to the point that changing it voids the warranty.
Driving a rotor by nature leaves the engine at a given RPM with the load changing all over the place from full load to almost no load at all during a descent. The stock exhaust is not setup to handle this much range, and neither are the Bing carburetors. Just as you said, the result is excessive EGTs and related problems at differing flight phases, and I just can't imagine a way to fix this with the stock setup. This is a situation where it seems that modifications are mandatory, and Rotax will not go along with any user modifications, so you will never get the support of the factory, and you are now literally flying off into the unknown. So with a good voiding warranty, aftermarket pipes and other modifications were made to cope with varying degrees of success. It seems possible to me that with the right modifications, it could work, but again, nobody has ever published good info on this that I have seen. Until this happens, you are just a test pilot with an unknown engine that may or may not blow up at any time and no way to know... So as you said, the failures are even more likely to be pilot induced as there are no known and properly documented procedures or limits.
There is even a more subtle issue with piston loading as the 582 was designed to have a range of load inertia and a rotor is WAY out of the designed load arm moment of the engine, and this can lead to lubrication failure from excessive piston to cylinder pressures. I explained this in another thread some time ago.

Back to coatings, I am not sure if they change the thermal expansion of the parts that much. Generally, metals do what they will and if they are confined in one direction, they will expand in another direction instead. The coatings will only change this if they manage to alloy deeply into the metal (change the metallic properties) which is the case sometimes.
The Rotax pistons are hyper eutectic. This is to slow their rate of thermal expansion to more closely match the cylinder, but there is only so much you can do. If you open the throttle of a cold engine, it does not matter what the piston is made of or coated with, it will not be the same temperature as the cylinder. I have seen bad operators cold seize a cast iron engine with cast iron pistons.
The bottom line here is that all metals change size with temperatures. Even if the piston and cylinder are the exact same metal, improper operation will cause the dimensions between them to change, there is no getting around this.
Due to the very nature of piston and cylinder design you have a thermal conflict until things are at operating temperature. Sure, you can change the alloy to move the expansion curves around, and you could build an engine that you must full throttle from cold so it does not seize, or you could build one you have to warm up before full throttle, but as of yet, nobody has figured out how to combine both conflicting needs into one.
So from the standpoint of coatings helping with cold seizures, I am not seeing that unless the coating would allow a greater piston cylinder distance. The GPI pistons are coated, and they are set at 0.006", much looser (double) than the stock pistons. What I see is that they are more prone to piston overheating and detonation than the stock pistons due to reduced thermal transfer. But with careful operation, I have seen that they last as long as the stock pistons, so with this actual case, I have not seen any loss or benefit.

It just keeps coming back to the 582 seems to be good enough without fancy coatings, and adding coatings would just drive up the price and make it harder to repair for not much gain.

While this is not an exact answer for the question of expansion related to coatings, it will have to do until the question is more specific, maybe what types (I know you specified ceramic, but you did not specify which method, thickness or other properties) of the coatings and where.
 
Joined
Apr 19, 2020
Messages
16
quick582.......YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT....you really can do whatever you want in your own shop..all day long.
But that fact isnt even remotely the point.
The point was....the OP asked a specific question to gain knowledge on a subject.
You then offered advice from the viewpoint that you are a Rotax 582 GURU but then transitioned to the fact that you've had the same question and you're going to start experimenting with the engine to see what outcome you can acheive.
All by the seat of your pants.....

Why did you delete the 20,000 word body of your original post ?
If your outlandish statements are valid then I'm sure someone will jump in and correct my dispute of your claims.

And now that you've deleted the original HUGE post with outlandish statements pertaining to Rotax you've replaced it with another post making outlandish claims about a particular aircraft/designer...Dennis/the Mini500.
Let me guess.....you're probably friends with Stewart and his posse arent you ?
To say that I am uneducated and naive is a HUGE misstep on your part and your assumptions would be quite inaccurate.
Yes the Mini500 had issues...and yes,I fixed my issues and have a wonderful aircraft to show for it.
Why dont you give Joe Reinke a call and he can educate you on the Mini500...he is a wealth of information and a real Salt of the Earth kind of guy with a great personality.
Or,if you prefer to talk with Dennis then I can make that happen for you too.

So now we are at 2 outlandish claims that you have made......the Rotax 582 and now the Mini500.
Are you going to delete that post as well.... ??????????

Btw.....since you made the statement :
Why dont you go into detail of your piloting experience and just exactly how mechanically savvy you are.
That way I dont have to imagine anything.
I must warn you though....my imagination can be quite vast....so thrill me in your post.
So,let's put that 4th post that you're about to make to the Forum right in the ole pickle barrel.......steady,steady

Isn't she pretty.....
View attachment 95773
View attachment 95774

Kevin
That is one awesome looking bird, I’d like to see it in person sometime.
 
Joined
Apr 19, 2020
Messages
16
It seems this line of answers have gone outside the original question, or statement.
I want it as reliable as earthly possible first and foremost.
I would like to get the most power out of it while maintaining the highest reliability. (which usually means anything to make it operate as smooth as possible through the throttle range) reduce vibration , excellent throttle response , correct and stable CHT and EGT. Proper jetting for my location and conditions.
In my opinion from working with engines for a living and all my life (Just not Rotax) I know they are mass produced and have flaws that can often be “made better “ casting flaws in airflow ports come to mind.
i guess the better statement for what I want is, I want my engine as reliable and power efficient as possible.
 
Top